It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

Sylvester wrote:It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

There has been some appropriate shifting of position by him, but sadly it should not have come as a result of having been badgered about it. The dictionary is obviously an important tool in language study, but it is in the actual usage that meanings are derived, which is a lesson that should be learned very early on in one's language study.

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

Sylvester wrote:It would be rather remiss of me to not acknowledge Dmytro's willingness to refine the connotations of sati over the course of the discussion. Pls give him the credit due even if you view him as not being fully accommodating our personal opinions on the matter.

Thank you, Sylvester. Unfortunately, there have been very little topical discussion, and a lot of phenomenal misunderstanding, coupled with misrepresentation of my words. Still, it seems that for some people this discussion was useful to understand the term "sati" as "remembrance" better.

It's time to continue the research the Buddha's words past the inheritance of Thomas Rhys David's dictionary, deeply embedded in modern Western Buddhism. His unfortunate mixing of 'sati' and 'sampajanna' can and should be corrected.

Dmytro wrote:
Thank you, Sylvester. Unfortunately, there have been very little topical discussion, and a lot of phenomenal misunderstanding, coupled with misrepresentation of my words.

Part of the problem is of the OPs own making, which has been being less than clear in his approach here.

Still, it seems that for some people this discussion was useful to understand the term "sati" as "remembrance" better.

And this comment makes my point.

It's time to continue the research the Buddha's words past the inheritance of Thomas Rhys David's dictionary, deeply embedded in modern Western Buddhism. His unfortunate mixing of 'sati' and 'sampajanna' can and should be corrected.

The Rhys Davids' dictionary certainly is not the last word, though it was a brilliant effort. A careful textual and linguistic study of these terms and how they are used in the suttas is, indeed, important. One of the things this thread did, via Gethin, is bring out to a fuller extent of how the word sati is used, and a careful study by qualified Pali-ists of the two somewhat overlapping terms, sati and sampajanna, would, indeed, be worthwhile and welcome.

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

Dmytro wrote:What I'm interested in this thread is how Buddha defines "sati" in the Pali Canon.

Where in the Pali "Canon" do we find the Buddha proclaiming one formal definition of "sati"?

Do you believe definitions are static?

Dmytro wrote:If you can offer substantiated opinion, please do so.

Please clarify the term, "substantiated opinion"?

Dmytro wrote:So far hardly anyone in this thread except for me has made a substantiated case for this or that meaning of "sati".

Please clarify the term "substantiated."

Dmytro wrote:I am grateful to Piotr, Sekha and Porpoise for some remarks that have been to the point, to Tilt for helping me to explore my patience, and to you for introducing me to the depths of Western Academia labeling culture. Your "definitionalist" and "provincionalist" are certainly gems in my collection.

You fancy me an Academic?
And are you saying "Eastern" Academics are unaware of these terms?
The Academy started in Ancient Greece long before the global labels "east" and "west".
Labeling is at least as old as humans.

Sekha wrote:Otherwise the outcome is the one I pointed to a couple of my post back. Dmytro is right (or can almost arguably be considered so) if you only take into account the textual side of things. He is wrong if you consider the effect of his statement on beginners who may take that word for the truth and get confused while trying to meditate. Many people want to acquire some knowledge of Pali in order to understand the practice better, and that will most probably confuse them.

All one has to do is take the textual side, as has been shown above. The texts, as has been shown, contrary to Dmytro's rigid claim, do show an expansion of the meaning of sati beyond just mere memory. This is something that the brilliant scholar, Ven Analayo has argued for convincingly in his excellent book, SATIPATTHANA and well as Rupert Gethin in various source have been quoted above.

I agree with Tilt,
from one of my teachers on the word "patisatimatta";

The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. Sati is more than just bare awareness, it is exact one-to-one recognition of the object as it is. I think I talked about this at the end of the following talk: http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/less ... -practice/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And, following the link,

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

...

Simply recognizing that we are walking requires no meditative training whatsoever.

To “fully comprehend” (pajānāti), one must cultivate the mental quality of “sati” or fortified recognition (thīra-saññā) by reminding oneself of the essential nature of the experience, as in “walking”. Reminding oneself in this way of what one already recognizes is equivalent to arresting the mind’s natural progression into projection, judgement, clinging, seeking, building up, and finally suffering.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

The word 'patisatimatta' appears in the satipatthana sutta... 'pati' means specific and 'matta' means mere. Sati is more than just bare awareness, it is exact one-to-one recognition of the object as it is. I think I talked about this at the end of the following talk: http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/less ... -practice/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And, following the link,

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

...

Simply recognizing that we are walking requires no meditative training whatsoever.

To “fully comprehend” (pajānāti), one must cultivate the mental quality of “sati” or fortified recognition (thīra-saññā) by reminding oneself of the essential nature of the experience, as in “walking”. Reminding oneself in this way of what one already recognizes is equivalent to arresting the mind’s natural progression into projection, judgement, clinging, seeking, building up, and finally suffering.

here's another good section:

"Another way of understanding this activity of fortifying one’s recognition is as a (label), a traditional meditative tool that has been used for millennia by meditators both Buddhist and non. A (label) is used to focus the mind on an object, arresting the mind’s natural inclination to jump from object to object. It is traditionally used to focus on a conceptual object, something a meditator conjures up in the mind – a picture or a spiritual object like a god or angel.

(Labeling) can, however, be used in much the same way in order to fix the mind on a real object as well, be it a physical sensation, a feeling, a thought, or an emotion. This is one way of understanding the word “sati” in the context of the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta; it is the use of a (label) to stabilize and fortify one’s bare recognition of an experience for what it is, allowing one to see clearly without prejudice or projection and thus remove any misapprehensions based on delusion or ignorance.

Once we cultivate sati, our minds will naturally incline towards observing the nature of phenomena; just as how a person who sees a tiger also sees its stripes, observation of the characteristics of every object of one’s experience is unavoidable for one who observes the experience objectively in this way. Through the cultivation of sati, one will be forced to see clearly the true nature of everything one clings to, as well as the result of such clinging. One will see that the objects of experience are universally impermanent, unsatisfying, and uncontrollable; one will see that clinging to such entities is akin to banging one’s head off of a wall – painful and utterly without purpose. This introspection-based knowledge is called “dhamma-vicaya”, and it is the second of the factors of enlightenment we are trying to cultivate as a means of destroying the taints"

may all be well

"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”

Seems like this is taken from Visuddhimagga 464. Full quote, in translation by Ven. Nyanamoli:

141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇa), thus it is minfulness (sati). It has the characteristic of not wobbling. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as guarding, or it is manifested as the state of confronting an objective field. Its proximate cause is strong preception (thirasaññā), or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). It should be regarded, however, as like a pillar because is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on.

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”

Here's the whole paragraph that you left out

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

Seems like this is taken from Visuddhimagga 464.

Bhante stated his sources pretty clearly. If it was he would have said so.. Bhante usually sources the Visuddhimagga when he uses it.

"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

Dmytro wrote:
141. (x) By its means they remember (saranti), or it itself remembers, or it is just mere remembering (saraṇa), thus it is minfulness (sati). It has the characteristic of not wobbling. Its function is not to forget. It is manifested as guarding, or it is manifested as the state of confronting an objective field. Its proximate cause is strong preception (thirasaññā), or its proximate cause is the foundations of mindfulness concerned with the body, and so on (see M. Sutta 10). It should be regarded, however, as like a pillar because is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper because it guards the eye-door, and so on.

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

what word??? this has nothing to do with what I posted.

"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

In the context of the bodhipakkhiyādhammā (Wings to Awakening/Aids to Enlightenment), sati functions as (following Reverend Thanissaro's renderings) a "frame of reference" (paṭṭhāna), a "faculty" (indrīya), a "strength" (bala), a "factor of awakening" (sambojjhaṅga), and as a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path (ariya-magga). Furthermore, if we tally each of the thirty-seven qualities that comprise the bodhipakkhiyādhammā by appearance per one of the Seven Sets of the bodhipakkhiyādhammā we find that next to samadhi (which gets the most "hits" at eight) sati gets seven "hits", tying it with "persistence" (viriya) for the second most "hits."

This not only shows the broadness and depth of the uses, meanings and "definitions" of sati, but also the importance of sati in virtually every aspect of practice.

And the importance of precisely defining sati is further diminished significantly by the fact "right view" (sammā-diṭṭhi) only gets one "hit" in the bodhipakkhiyādhammā.

The Visuddhimagga-Mahatika 229 straightforwardly connects the "thirasaññā", with the sati being established on nimitta (representation). ( Nimittaṃ ṭhapetabbanti satiyā tattha tattha sukhappavattanatthaṃ thiratarasañjānanaṃ pavattetabbaṃ. Thirasaññāpadaṭṭhānā hi sati. ) So this word has nothing to do with "simple awareness of the object".

what word??? this has nothing to do with what I posted.

"thirasaññā" from:

According to the Abhidhamma, sati arises based on fortified recognition (thīra-saññā). Whereas ordinary recognition (saññā) is not enough to keep the mind in objective awareness, once we fortify or reaffirm this recognition, not letting the mind move beyond simple awareness of the object for what it is, our minds will penetrate the nature of the object to the core, dispelling all doubt as to its essential nature as something worth clinging to or not.

“sati” would therefore be better translated as “recognition”, and this is how it has been referred to throughout this chapter. “sati”, in the context of the bojjhaṅgas is the deliberate and sustained recognition that allows one to see the objects of experience as they truly are.

Sati as "recognition" is an interesting take, but isn't that the function of sanna ( perception )?